|
|
2007 Curmudgeon's Corner
2006 Archives 2005 Archives 2004 Archives 2003 Archives 2002 Archives 2001 Archives .Fax to the Honorable John Baird, Federal Environment Minister, re: need for independent panel environmental assessment of Ontario Power Generation’s proposed deep underground radioactive waste dump at its Bruce site in Kincardine, Ontario, January 15, 2007 .Full Panel EA needed for proposed Bruce underground nuke waste site, January 15, 2007 Hon. John Baird Minister of the Environment House of Commons Ottawa, Ontario K1A 0A6 Dear Minister Baird, The December 21, 2006, recommendation of the Canadian Nuclear Safety Commission (CNSC) that the environmental assessment of Ontario Power Generation’s proposed deep underground radioactive waste dump at its Bruce site in Kincardine, Ontario, be upgraded (‘bumped up’) from a comprehensive study to a panel review is a welcome development. However, I have recently been given to understand that the CNSC itself intends to conduct the panel review. For many good and valid reasons, conduct of a panel review and public hearings by the CNSCin this situation would really be quite an unacceptable way of achieving the kind of democratic process and accountability to the Canadian people required for a matter of such major environmental importance. Based on an April 26, 2006 letter to me, from former environment minister, Rona Ambrose, (see below), I made the logical assumption that if such a public review were to be undertaken, it would involve an independent panel appointed by the federal minister of environment under provisions of the Canadian Environmental Assessment Act (CEAA). That process would include the presentation of evidence to the panel, and cross-examination of witnesses. Further, the panel could modify the scope of the hearing, and solicit its own experts. Ms. Ambrose told me that The CNSC would provide her with a report, “...recommending the appropriate level of environmental assessment for this project.” She stated that she “...will then make a decision as to whether to refer the project back to CNSC to continue the comprehensive study, or to refer the project to a mediator or a review panel.” (See my letter of March 8, 2006, below) Since she obviously did not seek CNSC continuation of the comprehensive study approach, then it would be up to you, as the new minister, to make the appropriate referral to a “mediator or a review panel.”Again, the only logical venue for such a public environmental assessment of this kind, would be under the provisions of the CEAA. Thank you for the opportunity to make my views known and that they will be seriously considered. Regards, Walt Robbins
